74th PZM Rally Poland

What's wrong with safety in Rally Poland? Here's 2 pictures that explain a lot. Clue: This is the 'before' one https://t.co/bGRQlVujdS https://t.co/ANWGBaxiAM

https://www.motorsport-news.co.uk/co...-rally-poland/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeakiwi

Are there any estimates on Rally Finland speeds?.

---

Fast, but 140 km/h for most of the stage is apparently ok if you add some chicanes

Continuing the subject of safety & more specifically safe spectating:
https://www.motorsport-news.co.uk/ne...ge-of-wrc-axe/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steve.mandzij

Not even NOT can spew out such shit like this.

If you don't care about spectator safety you are not a rally fan, because thanks to spectators who couldn't take care of themselves your beloved Group B was banned. If people don't take the same precautions now then we won't have rally at all. That's not what you want, unless, that is, you don't really like rally.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

---

No, Group B was banned because of knee-jerk overreaction by some FISA bureaucrats to a couple of deaths. And that's what bureaucrats do after all deaths, because their job as they see it is to cover their own asses, damn the consequences to the rest of us.

I love this sport for what it was, and what little of that remains in it despite every attempt by the FIA to get rid of it. You are the lot who think the sport would be the same if it was sanitized to be perfectly safe. Except you don't think about what that entails, because... well... I don't know why you don't think about that. But you should.

PS. Maybe he doesn't say it in the most tactful way, but a lot of what NOT says on a lot of subjects is the truth. But with most people it's all about saying things in pretty, friendly, non-confrontational ways. I don't care about that at all. I read something and I ask myself, "Is what this person is saying objectively correct or not?" You would all do well to do the same.

Can N.O.T. please send his brother to his room?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EightGear

Can N.O.T. please send his brother to his room?

---

Cool, cool. So no argument, no logic, just subtle digs. And you will win the debate, because your opinion is extremely popular. Safety is the most important thing, right? "There can be no compromise on safety!" Those are the actual words of Yves Matton. https://www.motorsport-news.co.uk/ne...ge-of-wrc-axe/

Never mind that if there is no compromise on safety, there is no motorsport, because any motorsport is fundamentally less safe than no motorsport. It's so blatantly illogical that it is hard for me to understand how someone can say something like that, but there it is. And I bet you agree with him. Brilliant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonnybobiche

Okay, you would literally prefer to have another rally driver growing old somewhere than have all the memories of Group B. Okay.

Your same kind of person would rather have a bunch of no names around than have explored the New World, or have reached the moon, or have achieved anything in life. Any time that anything requires any kind of sacrifice, fuck that, right? Because we can do it a safer way, and if we can't, it's not worth doing. Right?

That is a pathetic attitude. But worse than that, it's a hypocrite attitude, because we both know that you wouldn't give a shit about rally if you didn't have those memories of Group B, and if the drivers weren't completely insane heroes.

You people all talk real pretty, but look deep inside yourselves for about ten minutes and ask yourselves what you truly love about rally, and then ask yourselves, "Is that actually SAFE?"

And if you answer yes, then shut up, because you're goddamn liars.


Now let's break down some of this bullshit:


"I fail to see what is exciting about a firebrigade truck going against the competitor on stage (even going in opposite direction alone is a big no
no)."

Actually, that was mildly exciting to see on TV. Even though I couldn't see it on TV. I watched it on youtube like 5 times. It was a big fuck up. That's exciting. If you can't see that, I can show you a million people who can see it.

"IMHO the event shall not be part of WRC even when the stages are super exciting until the organiazion is able to handle it."

Hopefully English is not your first language, and you meant "should not" instead of "shall not". Don't worry, it's not my first language either. But I think I'm right in saying: The event should be part of WRC because the stages are super exciting, even if the organization is not able to handle it, because we are not a bunch of fucking little girls who will sue each other if we get a broken nail.


"Trust spectators to accept the consequences? Accidents, injuries and death, yep that would work well, just ask the families left behind and drivers like Paddon and Mikkelsen and many others...."

OK, so you don't trust spectators to take care of themselves? You don't trust people to take care of themselves? They're too stupid to take care of themselves? They need someone smart like you, or Jean Todt, to take care of them because they're too stupid to make wise decisions? OK.

I mean, what? OK Paddon and Mikkelsen killed two people in the last like 10 years of rallying, and one or two more killed their co drivers. What, does that mean we shouldn't have rally any more? I know what you're going to say. Because you're a hypocrite, you're going to say, "Of course we should have rally, but we should try our hardest to avoid this in the future" Guess what. Trying your hardest to avoid it in the future means not having any more rally. That is the hardest you can try, and I guarantee that will avoid this in the future. But you aren't willing to do that, are you, hypocrite?

"Crowing about safety? You can never, ever be too vocal about safety. "

OK, here's me being too vocal about safety: We shouldn't allow any spectators. They shouldn't be allowed to touch the cars. They shouldn't be allowed to step onto the track in any way. They shouldn't be allowed to help out the drivers. It should be like F1. Actually it should be tougher than F1. Everyone should stay at home and the drivers should drive on roads closed to everyone. Even cameramen. In fact the drivers themselves shouldnt be exposed to danger, they should drive remote controlled cars through Richard Burns Rally and everyone should watch from home through WRC+.

Is that not too vocal about safety? Goddamn people don't actually think about what they're saying. Take a fucking philosophy class or something. Learn to think. Do better than our FIA masters. Motorsport is INHERENTLY dangerous. There is no amount or version of motorsport that is as safe as not doing motorsport. Therefore any motorsport fan is a fan of some amount of danger. You people think you're right because you're nice. But nice isn't always right. Sometimes it's wrong, and harmful to what you actually love. Learn that.

---

Interesting reply to my post.

Out of interest, what age are you?

30 in a few days. I do apologize for some of the language in that post, reading it back now. I was pretty riled up about something entirely unrelated. I stand by the main points, though.

Don't You feel that there is something wrong about argumenting by an era which was already over when You were born? You know things look different when decades pass and only stories are beying told.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonnybobiche

30 in a few days. I do apologize for some of the language in that post, reading it back now. I was pretty riled up about something entirely unrelated. I stand by the main points, though.

---

What you might not appreciate is that many people here understand some of the points you were trying to make, even if you presented them in pretty awful way. However, some of the things you don't seem to grasp:

1) That rallying doesn't exist in a vacuum.
2) That we can't go "back to how things were" - this is true to everything in life in general, btw.

And believe me, I remember the Group B era well - I was there to see it live. However, I do not see it as a glorified golden era like so many others. There were enormous issues with safety back then - issues that definitely should not have been ignored then, but are totally impossible to ignore nowadays.

Also, If you haven't noticed the motor industry in general is in the middle of it's biggest change probably ever. Motorsport is not the hottest thing right now either. Rallying especially is a vulnerable sport in many ways, as the competition is not held on purpose-build courses where safety and other issues can be monitored on a wholly different level, unlike basically most other types of motor races.

The negative impact of a huge incident involving spectators (or competitors, but especially spectators) in a WRC rally would be enormous. We who truly enjoy this sport understand this, and are willing to sometimes compromise to safeguard the future. Sure, I dislike the modern "walled garden" spectator areas common in most WRC events as much as almost every rally fan. However, I also understand that this is necessary, especially in WRC events which bring in lots of spectators not familiar with rallying or motorsport in general. In a modern top level event there has to be a certain level of safety - otherwise there will be soon no event to follow at all.

And sure, you might not always get to the best spot in these modern events, like you used to in the "good old days". That is the price way pay - deal with it.

If you really want to support rallying, go to your local events, there you can almost always get to the best spot, even with the increased safety standards. Even better, at the same time you are supporting the local motoring club and safeguarding the future of rallying. And if you want to go all out in your support - get into marshalling as well. Not only you get to see the "safety issue" from totally different viewpoint, you are also becoming a vital part in making the event happen year after year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonnybobiche

I read something and I ask myself, "Is what this person is saying objectively correct or not?" You would all do well to do the same.

---

Following that fine principle one has to correct you: it wasn’t neither the public nor the bureaucrats fault, Gr.B cars were simply too dangerous.

I’m not in the mood to look for driver’s quotes, but everybody aged enough remembers they all mentioned (at the time or some years later) that driving those cars was a permanent risk.

The ban occurred after Toivonen and Cresto tragic accident in Corsica, which didn’t involve any spectator, because it became obvious the passive and active Gr.B poor safety standards shouldn’t be allowed anymore.

On current cars safety I’ll say what I’ve said a long time ago: these car are great and much safer than the old Gr.B, but the speed increase shouldn’t be taken lightly: spectators control must be a priority and second level drivers shouldn’t be allowed to use them (superlicense mandatory).

A final note: IMO dissonant views are always welcomed, there’s nothing worse than unanimity in a debate, but it’s wrong to confuse free opinion with systematic insult, like the forum troll you’ve mentioned (hopefully not your role model) does.

Too many lines debating over a simple fact. That's too dangerous -> it has not improved over the years -> get out from WRC and hopefully from rally in general.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rally Power

The ban occurred after Toivonen and Cresto tragic accident in Corsica, which didn’t involve any spectator, because it became obvious the passive and active Gr.B poor safety standards shouldn’t be allowed anymore.

---

Yes. Canceling Group B wasn't only about spectator issues. Of course it's impossible to say if FISA would have decided the same without the Portugal accident, but the accidents of Bettega and Vatanen were still fresh in the memory. The drivers would have wanted to continue with Group B or Group S cars, if they would have taken the hot turbos away or increased the safety in some other way. And actually there were seven driver deaths in WRC events between 1987-1990 but only three since then. And same goes for spectator deaths. The safety has been improved on both sides, although the cars are again faster, now probably faster than ever, but also safer than ever.

First off I just want to apologize again for the salty language earlier. That was not on.

As for the actual safety issues and the future of rallying, I think that it's a mistake to sacrifice the sport in any way for what we pretend will be a temporary change to get through a rough patch. I think this is a form of managed decline. It's a vicious cycle. Let's say you make things safer, but it requires some sacrifice to the sport. Pushing crowds back, for example, or requiring all four wheels to be on the car, or getting rid of Safari with its open roads. The result is that the sport is a bit safer, but also has fewer fans and fewer eyeballs. So there's less money, less manufacturer interest. Also, the culture around the sport demands ever-increasing safety, so whatever change you made is now the new normal, and anything less than that is seen as outrageously dangerous. For both of those reasons, there's less money to pay outrageous insurance fees. So you have to go even safer. Eventually someone asks, "hey, why should there be any spectators allowed to line the roads at all? Can't we just close the stages to spectators? That's safer!" Or they might suggest something ridiculous, like, say, an average speed limit.

Anyway, the point is, I don't think this road leads to motorsport being saved. Again, it seems like managed decline. The counterexample to all this is the Isle of Man TT, in which multiple competitors die literally every year, and yet the event is as popular as ever (with the crowds, the riders, and the sponsors) and as far as I know there's no issue with insurance.

Name another sport that kills its fans?

Rallying (as whole) does. That's rare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rallyfiend

Name another sport that kills its fans?

Rallying (as whole) does. That's rare.

---

You could get hit by a baseball or a hockey puck or a spectator stand at an arena could collapse.

Are you guys seriously debating on those issues? I think that a heavy vehicle going the opposite direction in a live stage is a common big No, No right? Plus, spectators playing bullfight with rally cars is a another common No, No, don't you think?Ok, I see that for some it may be exciting or spectacular but it will only take one bad luck moment for rallying to be banned. Is it worth it? A few moments of adrenaline for a serious injury/death and significant consequences for the rest of rally fans. Just use your brain, people...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonnybobiche

First off I just want to apologize again for the salty language earlier. That was not on.

As for the actual safety issues and the future of rallying, I think that it's a mistake to sacrifice the sport in any way for what we pretend will be a temporary change to get through a rough patch. I think this is a form of managed decline. It's a vicious cycle. Let's say you make things safer, but it requires some sacrifice to the sport. Pushing crowds back, for example, or requiring all four wheels to be on the car, or getting rid of Safari with its open roads. The result is that the sport is a bit safer, but also has fewer fans and fewer eyeballs. So there's less money, less manufacturer interest. Also, the culture around the sport demands ever-increasing safety, so whatever change you made is now the new normal, and anything less than that is seen as outrageously dangerous. For both of those reasons, there's less money to pay outrageous insurance fees. So you have to go even safer. Eventually someone asks, "hey, why should there be any spectators allowed to line the roads at all? Can't we just close the stages to spectators? That's safer!" Or they might suggest something ridiculous, like, say, an average speed limit.

Anyway, the point is, I don't think this road leads to motorsport being saved. Again, it seems like managed decline. The counterexample to all this is the Isle of Man TT, in which multiple competitors die literally every year, and yet the event is as popular as ever (with the crowds, the riders, and the sponsors) and as far as I know there's no issue with insurance.

---

It's nice you realized you'd been "hostile" :)

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonnybobiche

Pushing crowds back, for example, or requiring all four wheels to be on the car, or getting rid of Safari with its open roads. The result is that the sport is a bit safer, but also has fewer fans and fewer eyeballs. So there's less money, less manufacturer interest.

---

How do you prove that more safety results in less interest in rallying? The world has changed since the 80's and 90's. Car sales numbers are going down and even brands go bankrupt. Driving is not cool anymore. Furthermore, I don't see anymore those tobacco sponsors who probably brought a lot of money to the sport in the earlier decades.

Sonnybobiche probably made at least one good point. Rallies are losing fans and media interest (based on my observations)

I do not have statistical data, but is it not rally Poland (along with perhaps very few other rallies) that is not losing fans and media interest? Based on my observations again - crowds of You guys, people from abroad are getting bigger and bigger every year. This year, for the first time in my life, I had a feeling that there are less Poles then foreigners.

As Sonnybobiche wrote earlier, but in other words. Ask yourself guys - What brought You here? Great stages or the opportunity to feel almost like group B emotions?

Safety first and above all attitude won't stop the trend (rallies less popular then before). IMHO there must be some golden medium between safety and lets call it emotions otherwise rallies will be just a niche in 10 to 20 years.

The fact that rallying keeps loosing interested is related to the global changes in the population and the perception of cars and motorsport as a whole. Young people generally aren't very interested in cars or motorbikes like our fathers were. Today large majority of people don't understand a shit about cars. They buy them as a means of transport not as a part of the lifestyle like it used to be. It will get only worse with more and more automization and electronics inside them, the heavier and more restricted traffic etc.

But what is driving the trend in the perception of cars and motorsport? Well, one thing is probably super boring car design since the mid 2000s. But as far as the perception of motorsport, maybe kids these days are bored by it because a lot of it is really boring, because it's been sanitized to death. That is certainly true of F1 and virtually anything the FIA touches.

One motorsport that is definitely growing year on year, however, is MotoGP. Heck, I watch it and I don't even like motorcycles. The riders are gladiators. Everyone can see them doing their thing on the bike, not increasingly cocooned like in F1. There are big injuries literally all the time, yet no one complains it's unsafe. No safety car. Bike crashes, race keeps going while marshals take it away. Lots of teams and a big number of bikes in every race. Lots of upcoming young talented kids, with a direct path into the sport. No pay drivers. Talent is what's rewarded. Is it a coincidence that it's not run by FIA?

Interesting debate. I can see both sides even though I agree safety should be number one. This becomes even more important if you've ever competed in an event.

I recently spectated rally Australia last year and it was the biggest shit show. The spectating areas were the in worst locations. All straights or extremely slow corners. Was so boring we didn't even go on the last day and we won't be going back unless they sort things out. Finland on the other hand was extremely well organized. The spectators areas had plenty of room and some locations were perfect with jumps, crests etc. You just need to get in early since you're competing with shit loads of people for good spots haha.

Obviously there were serious issues with spectators in Poland. I've seen a ton of videos where people were standing at the edges of the road in a high speed section. You have to remember people get extremely excited and want to be close to the action... it's human nature, but in Finland they had several marshalls to control the crowds. It was obviously a combination of bad organization and crazy fans. In Finland my wife and I were at spectating area and an old gentleman was walking by and said "you know the cars are coming from the other direction? You should move across unless you want to get squished and pierced by carbon fiber and metal" we laughed and walked across because like a dummy I had no idea which way the cars were running. We ended up warning a few other spectators in the same manner and all was good.

In short what I'm saying is just go to Rally Finland (I'm going back because I'm dying to see the 2017 cars) and have all the other rally organizers learn from one the of the best spectator friendly rallies IMO.

World Rallycross is also growing even though there are no driver's being injured and fans are safe in their stands..

Can we get this straight - increasing danger to anyone is not the way to grow rallying.

I wouldn't mind if Rally Poland was dropped and replaced with Rally New Zealand as a second fast gravel rally.

I love rallycross, but spectating at rallies is an experience which is so different from the traditional: sit in the stands and watch type of motorsport. I also think this is what hurts rally. Most people do not want to hike even 1km to find a spot and wait for a car to go by once maybe twice. I feel this is why organizers are trying to do fancy super special stages to attract crowds. Similar to what Mexico did even though it resulted in canceled stages etc. Watching live is also great, but I recently tried to get a friend into WRC and he laughed when I told
him to get WRC+ for a fee... just one example

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnttiL

I wouldn't mind if Rally Poland was dropped and replaced with Rally New Zealand as a second fast gravel rally.

---

Well New Zealand was already in the cards and I think Poland just handed it to them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Simmi

I think this sort of thing happens and 10 times worse every day on WRC road sections. That camera card guy looked like he was trying to wave him out onto the road but did a sh*t job.

---

It would help if they didn't drive like, well rally drivers, between stages. Nearly got front ended by Tanak in Wales last year overtaking on a bend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirek

The fact that rallying keeps loosing interested is related to the global changes in the population and the perception of cars and motorsport as a whole. Young people generally aren't very interested in cars or motorbikes like our fathers were. Today large majority of people don't understand a shit about cars. They buy them as a means of transport not as a part of the lifestyle like it used to be. It will get only worse with more and more automization and electronics inside them, the heavier and more restricted traffic etc.

---

I don't think this is entirely true. In example the simracing scene is growing quite fast. Dirt 4 just came out and is possibly the best rally sim ever made. Also other sims - Asetto Corsa, rFactor, iRacing and so on. So the interest is there, it's just different. I would like the idea that in the future there be more cheap trackday cars and entry level rally cars for to much broader audience to enjoy themselves. Automated cars in traffic sounds logical, driving a supercar on a street is just silly, ofcourse the custom culture won't go anywhere.

I guess the effort you need to put in to have an authentic rally experience is waaaay more than most other motorsports, let alone other sports. That gamer or esports fan is going to have to go way out of their comfort zone to visit the Welsh forests for example.

That's also the reason teams often struggle to get sponsors. It's pretty difficult to get any kind of in-event VIP experience compared to hosting clients at a race circuit or even WRX track.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnttiL

I wouldn't mind if Rally Poland was dropped and replaced with Rally New Zealand as a second fast gravel rally.

---

Is that the goal of this discussion? Discredit rally Poland in favor of New Zeland?
Yes, rally poland has safety issues, but they are not much different from any rally. How many pictures of "idiots" we have in previous discussions? A lot. Why we had dead person at Monte Carlo? Because of good safety? This plot against Rally Poland is complete b****t.

How many times in the last twenty years did a truck go on stage against the competitor? Maybe never until this weekend? If that's not a major safety fuck up what is?

Some press photos in high resolution



http://i.imgur.com/A7NPWSu.jpg




http://i.imgur.com/nrEhvIl.jpg




http://i.imgur.com/IW8pJTw.jpg




http://i.imgur.com/N5spQtr.jpg





http://i.imgur.com/PTP9sit.jpg




http://i.imgur.com/lqyEnNJ.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirek

How many times in the last twenty years did a truck go on stage against the competitor? Maybe never until this weekend? If that's not a major safety fuck up what is?

---

I mean, that's one lunatic fire truck driver. I'm not sure how the rally organizers could have reasonably predicted and avoided that situation. Seems like it could happen anywhere, given a sufficiently silly person at the wheel. Don't think it counts as evidence of a systematic failure at rally poland. It was a major fuck up, for sure, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mirek

How many times in the last twenty years did a truck go on stage against the competitor? Maybe never until this weekend? If that's not a major safety fuck up what is?

---

From the video we can't say.
Maybe fire truck driver wanted to just pass and park. I can't imagine driver being so retarded to drive against racing cars.
In any case, do you see this incident as more significant then the death in MC?
How many people called for scrapping it?
Dual standards, that's what you guys are doing here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jparker

Is that the goal of this discussion? Discredit rally Poland in favor of New Zeland?

---

My point was just that we'd replace a fast gravel rally with a fast gravel rally, and I knew NZ was being planned for a comeback.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mknight

Time differences on PS are always very small. Road position difference between 4th or 6th on the road is probably negligible, but on gravel rallies there will always be huge difference between 1st and 3rd+.

That's why I find it outrageous that such an important point is not clearly defined in the rules... and even more outrageous that teams don't seem to complain loud about it. That said as far as I can see Poland is the first rally of the year where a Rally2 driver didn't go before "normal" drivers.

---

Poland was a first rally with just one rally2 driver and huge "normal" drivers.
So it's very easy to calculate.
If we have a 30 min regroup it can put rally2 driver ahead only if 7 "normal" drivers left
If regroup 45 min - 11 drivers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sonnybobiche

I mean, that's one lunatic fire truck driver. I'm not sure how the rally organizers could have reasonably predicted and avoided that situation. Seems like it could happen anywhere, given a sufficiently silly person at the wheel. Don't think it counts as evidence of a systematic failure at rally poland. It was a major fuck up, for sure, though.

---

You have obviously no idea how organization of such event works. The fire truck was part of the event emergency system and went there on someone's order. I'm sorry but such situation would mean serious consequences for the organization even on second league national level and is competely unacceptable on WRC level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jparker

In any case, do you see this incident as more significant then the death in MC?

---

Yes, I do because this situation is a system failure while some spectator standing wrong is not always such case. I don't bash that much the spectator safety because I know how extremely difficult it is with spectators. You know in my country we have maybe the strcictest spectator regulation in Europe and still we had number of deadly accidents which were nearly in all cases caused by the spectators themselves because they simply ignored the organization.

those idiots from estonia are behind all this sh*t

Ok this has got out of hand - I shall just delete offensive posts if this continues -for or against.

Just putting * in a word doesn't make the sentence any less disrespectful!